Judgment 1. The petitioner joined as a Panchayat Assistant on 01.02.1998 in the third respondent Village Panchayat. Subsequently, the post of Panchayat Assistant was re-designated as Panchayat Secretary on 29.08.2011. During October 2011, Elections took place for Panchayat and the third respondent got elected as President for Ramachandrapuram Panchayat in Pallipattu Panchayat Union, Thiruvallur District. 2. While so, the petitioner was issued with the impugned suspension order dated 23.09.2013 contemplating departmental action. It was alleged in the suspension order that the petitioner failed to produce Panchayat records and relevant documents to Assistant Director of Panchayats during Panchayat inspection on 06.09.2013 and by checking the bank statement of the Ramachandrapuram Panchayat Account 1, the Assistant Director of Panchayats had stated in the inspection report that the expenditure to the tune of Rs.2,70,080/-have been made without proper vouchers and entries in cashbook. Challenging the aforesaid order of suspension, the petitioner has come up with the present writ petition. 3. A counter affidavit was filed by the first respondent refuting the allegations. In paragraph 5 of the counter, it is stated that the President of the Panchayat misappropriated the village fund in collusion with the Panchayat Secretary to the tune of Rs.2,70,080/-. 4. But the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner has periodically reported to the Block Development Officer about the misappropriation committed by the President. In this regard, he has also brought to my notice various representations sent by him and the same are also enclosed in the typed set of papers. 5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents. 6. Though the suspension order was passed as early as on 23.09.2013, it is stated that no charge memo has been issued for the past one year. It is not known as to why no charge memo was issued 7. In these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- i) the first respondent is directed to issue charge memo to the petitioner and after getting explanation from him, he shall decide as to whether he should accept the explanation and drop the charges or to proceed with the enquiry. In these circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions:- i) the first respondent is directed to issue charge memo to the petitioner and after getting explanation from him, he shall decide as to whether he should accept the explanation and drop the charges or to proceed with the enquiry. ii) if the first respondent is not inclined to accept the explanation submitted by the petitioner and wants to proceed further with the enquiry, then he shall afford a reasonable opportunity to the petitioner in an enquiry. iii) The first respondent shall examine the witnesses in the presence of the petitioner. The petitioner shall also be given opportunity to let in evidence on his side. iv) After receipt of the report from the Enquiry Officer, the same shall be furnished to the petitioner enabling him to give his remarks and thereafter, final order shall be passed by the first respondent. v) The first respondent is directed to undertake the aforesaid exercise within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.